Mexican-American Schools Case Study

On December 16, Christopher Eckhardt and Mary Beth Tinker wore their black armbands to school and were sent home. The next day, John Tinker wore his armband and was also sent home. Because of the protest, the students did not return to school until after New Year’s Day. This was the date they planned to end the protest.4 Parents, of the children who were sent home, were furious.

The beginning of the sit-ins were hard, but they overcame many hardships to achieve their goal. Most of their sit-ins they suffered from being attacked by white customers. They got beat up and never said a word and just dealt with it. After having their sit-ins they motivated others to do the same

Court Decision(s): The Court ruled in favor of the students. In accordance with the First Amendment, their actions were constitutional. It was not disruptive, nor did it invade other’s rights. However, this did not give unlimited freedom of speech to the students. As long as they continued the “peaceful” protesting without causing distractions, they could continue.

When the cancellation was announced, Latino students organized a student walkout from their school. However, it was this activism that fueled the anti-Chicano Studies argument.

In this text, the case hinges on whether the students created a disturbance. There was a fear that they might create one, but since they never did, the court held that their self-expression was protected.

The 1968 Chicano Blowouts set forth to make public, the concerns of the students and their parents, of the quality of their education. They had goals for bilingual and bicultural educations, more Latino teachers and administrators hired into the school systems, smaller class sizes, better facilities, and a revision of the textbooks to include the history of Mexican Americans. This began with the outrage towards Mexican Americans having the greatest number of high school dropout rates, and lowest number of college attendance out of all the ethnic groups. The poor facilities and constant undermining of the Mexican American students in the classroom environments by teachers, created an atmosphere that was hostile to learning. These oppressive conditions, along with the inability to create changes to better the students' conditions, compelled students, activists and teachers to collaborate in an effort to attain an equal footing in the world of education. Utilizing examples from the African American Civil Rights Movement, such as boycotts and walkouts, these people decided the fastest method to making better conditions was to first make the dilemma public in order to pressure the school board into complying with their terms for educational reform. When their needs were not met, the students took part in walkouts which were referred to as "Blowouts."

The principal suspended the students until the end of the protest. The Tinker’s sued the School District for violating their freedom of expression right.

Various details, like teachers giving up on students, or teachers easily removing a student from class can attribute to the success young Latinos will have with their education thus impacting the surveys taken on education levels of Latinos as shown in Latinos in the United States. Many individuals had the knowledge of what education can lead to and what high standards were and part of the problem of why they do not follow it is their economic situation, as discussed in class. During class, we watched a documentary called “The Graduates” and undocumented students feel that education may not be a possibility and that reminds me how

The third thing I learned was that everyone went to boycott on behalf of the Chicano rights and the Farmers rights. With the help of Brown, blacks, and whites the Chicanos voices were heard from the School

Students organized a peaceful walkout that lasted a couple days, they organized themselves so they could all walk out at the same time, some of this walkouts turned very brutal but even with the police attacking them they did not stop the walkouts, specially when Sal Castro and other leaders were arrested, students got together to raise their voices and make the government see they had rights. After that walkout the government had no more option than to listen to the students and make a fair educational system, by that time bi-lingual education increased 25% and students had more power over the educational

According to Marta Tienda and Faith Mitchell in the book “Hispanics and the future of America” another problem may be teacher’s perceptions of their student’s abilities.

The movie “WALKOUT” features a high school student by the name of Paula Crisotomo who is tired of being treated unequally. She tries to meet up with students and other authorities to figure out a way to combat the unfair treatment. They are punished for speaking spanish in school, they are not allowed to use certain bathrooms, and they are even forced to do janitorial work as punishments. With inspiration from her teacher, she decides to hand out surveys to see who might be interested in changes to the high school. However, the school decides to meet her needs, so she urges the school to walk out after attendance is taken. After numerous walkouts, many arrests, and many other challenges that were faced throughout her journey, she eventually

In the Preface of Major Problems in Mexican American History Zaragosa Vargas writes, "Nearly two thirds of Latinos in the United States are of Mexican descent, or Chicanos- a term of self definition that emerged during the 1960's and early 1970s civil rights movement. Chicanos reside mainly in the Southwest, the Pacific Northwest, and the Midwest. Their history begins in the precolonial Spanish era, and they share a rich mestizo cultural heritage of Spanish, Indian, and African origins. The Chicanos' past is underscored by conquest of the present-day American Southwest first by the Spanish and then by the United States following the Mexican American War" (xv). When one thinks of a Chicano one thinks of the Mayans and Aztecs, the conquests,

There were but a few faculty and staff members (often those who made less than they should have) that were willing to agree with or stand up for what the protestors believed was legitimate. The majority of the faculty refused to wield their power; however, there were faculty members that Dean Deane mentions in an interview with Kunen saying, “…if we have a pattern or disruption of University life, many faculty are going to quietly leave. They simply won’t live in this kind of atmosphere” (page 115). Had the University had more faculty that were willing to stand up for the students, and actually, “take the view of students into consideration when they planned restructuring of the University,” (page 123) like Temple Committee, (which came across as a charity anyhow), perhaps social change on the campus would have happened much sooner and with far less violence.

There might be some moral issues required as for the organizations ensnared in the demonstrations. Alternatives antedating may emerge, not just as a result of administrative mistakes, careless record keeping, or inner control framework disappointment,